T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T M A R V I N D . H O RN E , e t a l., P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l an t s, v. UN I T E D S T AT E S DE P AR T ME NT OF A G R I C U L T U R E , e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 15748 D . C . N o . 1 : 0 9 - c v - 0 1 7 9 0 - O WW S KO ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia O l i ve rW . W a nge r , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r14, 2012 S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: A L A R C O N , G R A B E R , an d B E R Z O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M a rv i n D. Ho rn e , Lau r aR. Ho rn e , a n d Ra i s i n Va l l e yFarms M a rk e t i n g , LL C ( “ the H orne s ” ) pe t i t i one d the U ni t e d S t a t e s D e pa rtm e ntof A gr i c ul tur e ( “ U S D A ” or

“ the a ge nc y ” ) t o e nga ge i n rul e m a ki ng t o c ha nge the a ge nc y ’ s r e gul a t i ons gove rni ng s e rvi c e of

f i na l a ge nc yor de r s . U S D A de ni e d the pe t i t i on, a nd the 

# FI LED OC T 02 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

d i s tr i c tc o u rtu p h e l d th e a g e n c y ’ s d e c i s i o n . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. § 1291 a nd r e m a nd t o the a ge nc y f orf urthe re xpl a na t i on of

i t s r e a s ons f

orde ny i ng the H orne s ’ pe t i t i on. T h e H o rn e s a r e C a lif

o rn iar a is in p r o d u c e r s . U S D A r e g u la te s r a is in pr oduc t i on a c c or di ng t o the R a i s i n M a rke t i ng O r de r( “ R M O ” ) , 7 C . F . R . § 989. 1 et s e q. , pr om ul ga t e d unde rthe A gr i c ul tur a l M a rke t i ng A gr e e m e ntA c tof 1937 ( “ A M A A ” ) , 7 U . S . C . § 601 e t s e q. I n M a r c h 2007, the H orne s pe t i t i one d the a g e n c y p u r s u a n t to A M A A § 6 0 8 c ( 1 5 ) ( A ) , s e e k in g a n e x e m p tio n f r o m th e R M O . A J u d ic ia l O f

f ic e r( “J O ” ) d is m is s e d th e p e titio n . U nde rs e c t i on 608c ( 15) ( B ) of the A M A A , the U . S . D i s tr i c tC ourt s ha ve ju r is d ic tio n to r e v ie w f

in a l a g e n c y o r d e r s , s o lo n g a s th e c o m p la in t “is f ile d w ith in tw e n tyd a y s f

r o m th e d a te o f

th e e n tryo f

s u c h ru lin g .” 7 U .S .C . § 6 0 8 c ( 1 5 ) ( B ) . U SD A ’ s “ Ru l e s o f

Pr a c t i c e G o v e rn i n g Pr o c e d u r e s o n Pe t i t i o n s t o M o d i f yo rt o Be E xe m pt e d f

r om M a rke t i ng O r de r s ” ( “ R ul e s of P r a c t i c e ” ) , 7 C . F . R . §§ 900. 50 et s e q. , pr ovi de tha taf

i na l a ge nc y or de r“ s ha l l be f i l e d w i th the he a r i ng c l e rk, w ho shal l se rve i tup on the part i es . ” I d. § 900. 66( b) . S e c t i on 900. 69( b) of the R ul e s of P ra ct i ce i nstruct s that S e rvi c e s ha l l be m a de e i the r( 1) byde l i ve r i ng ac opy of the doc um e ntor pape rt o the i ndi vi dua l t o be s e rve d . . . ; or( 2) byl e a vi ng ac opy of the do cum entor paper atthe pri nci pal offi ce or pl ac e of busi ness of such3

i ndi vi dua l . . . ; or( 3) by r e gi s t e r i ng a nd m a i l i ng ac opy of the doc um e ntor paper, addres se d t o such i nd i vi du al . . . athi s or i t s l as tkn ow n p ri nci pal of f i c e , pl a c e of

bus i ne s s , orr e s i de nc e . P r oof of s e rvi c e he r e unde rs ha l l be m a de by the a f

f i da vi tof the pe r s on w ho a c tua l l ym a de the s e rvi c e . T he a f f i da vi tc ont e m pl a t e d he r e i n s ha l l be f i l e d w i th the he a r i ng c l e rk, a nd the f a c tof f i l i ng the r e of

s ha l l be not e d on the doc ke tof the pr oc e e di ng. T h e H o rn e s w e r e th e v ic tim s o f af a ile d n o tic e a tte m p t b yc e rtif ie d m a il, w hi ch di d n otre ac h them un t i l w el l -a ft erthe tw enty- day t i m e l i m i tt o see k revi ew i n the di stri ctcourt . T hey non ethel es s f i l ed a c om pl ai nti n the di stri ctcourt se eki ng re vi ew of the JO ’ s dec i si on . T he di stri ctcourt , ci t i ng the “ tw enty- day rul e” i n 7 U . S . C . § 6 08 c( 15 )( B ), di sm i ss ed the com pl ai ntfor l ac k o f s ubj ec tm att er ju r is d ic tio n . H

orne v. D ep’t

of A gri c. , N o . 1 : 0 8 - C V - 0 0 4 0 2 - O WW - S MS , 2 0 0 8 WL 4 9 1 1 4 3 8 , a t * 3 - 4 ( E .D . C a l. N o v . 1 3 , 2 0 0 8 ) ( u n p u b lis h e d ) . W e a f f i rm e d i n a n unpubl i s he d m e m or a ndum di s pos i t i on, butnot e d the

“ ob vi ou s unfai rnes s of the re sul t . ” H orne v. D ep’t

of A gri c. , 395 F . A ppx. 486, 489 ( 9th C i r . 2010) . “ [ I ] n r e s pons e t o oure xpl i c i ti nqui ry , the U S D A . . . t [ ook] th e p o si t i o n th ati tl ack [ed ] d i scret i o n t o rem ed y th e p ro b l em ” i n th e H o rn es’ c a s e — ap o s itio n w e f

o u n d “d u b io u s ” u n d e rth e R u le s o f P r a c tic e . I

d. ; s e e, e . g. , 7 C .F .R . § 9 0 0 .6 9 ( c ) ( p r o v id in g f o rd is c r e tio n a rytim e e x te n s io n s w h e r e “th e r e is good r e a s on” ) . N e ve rthe l e s s , w e not e d tha ti tw a s “ the pr ovi nc e of the D e pa rtm e nt a n d n o t th is c o u rt” to a s s e s s th e p r o p r ie tyo f its o w n ru le s . H

orne , 39 5 F . A pp x. atT i t l e 5 U . S . C . § 5 5 5 (e) p ro v i d es: 1 P r om ptnot i c e s ha l l be gi ve n of the de ni a l i n w hol e ori n pa rtof aw r i tt e n appl i c a t i on, pe t i t i on, orothe rr e que s tof a n i nt e r e s t e d pe r s on m a de i n c onne c t i on w i th a ny a ge nc ypr oc e e di ng. E xc e pti n a f f i rm i ng ap r io rd e n ia l o rw h e n th e d e n ia l is s e lf - e x p la n a to ry , th e n o tic e s h a ll b e a c c o m p a n ie d b y ab r ie f s ta te m e n t o f

th e g r o u n d s f

o rd e n ia l. 4 489. W hi l e the i re a r l i e rpe t i t i on w a s be i ng l i t i ga t e d, the H orne s f i l e d as e c ond pe t i t i on w i th the a ge nc y r e que s t i ng tha ti t“ e nga ge i n rul e m a ki ng t o a m e nd the R u le s o f P r a c tic e ” to r e q u ir e m o r e p r o m p t n o tic e s u c h a s b ye m a il o rf a x . See 5 U . S . C . § 553( e ) ( “ E a c h a ge nc y s ha l l gi ve a n i nt e r e s t e d pe r s on the r i ghtt o pe t i t i on f o rth e is s u a n c e , a m e n d m e n t, o rr e p e a l o f aru le .” ) . T he H ornes c i t ed the fa i l ed s e rvi c e by m a i l i n the i row n e a r l i e rc a s e , poi nt i ng outtha tthe e xi s t i ng R ul e s “ ha ve no prov i si on for prom pt l y and expedi t i ou sl y not i fy i ng P et i t i on er s [ of fi nal agency o r d e r s ], d e s p ite th e . . . s h o rt tim e f r a m e s f o rP e titio n e r s to ap p e a l . . . d e c is io n s ” to th e d i stri ctco u rt . U S D A resp o n d ed t o th e H o rn es’ ru l em ak i n g p et i t i o n— as i tm u st unde rthe A dm i ni s tr a t i ve P r oc e dur e A c t( A P A ) , 5 U . S . C . § 555( e )

— i n aone - pa ge 1 le tte rd e n y in g th e H o rn e s ’ r e q u e s t. Se e al s o 7 C . F . R . § 1. 28 ( “ P e t i t i ons by i nt e r e s t e d pe r s ons i n a c c or da nc e w i th 5 U . S . C . § 553( e ) . . . w i l l be gi ve n pr om pt c ons i de r a t i on a nd pe t i t i one r s w i l l be not i f i e d pr om pt l yof

the di s pos i t i on m a de of th e irp e titio n s .” ) .5

A n agency’ s dec i si on no tt o eng age i n rul em aki ng i s e nt i t l ed t o a hi gh l evel o f ju d ic ia l d e f

e r e n c e . Se e M

a s s a c h u s e t t

s v . EP A , 5 4 9 U .S . 4 9 7 , 5 2 7 - 2 8 ( 2 0 0 7 ) . D ef er ence i s e spec i al l y m er i t ed w here an agency’ s proce du ra l re gu l at i on s are in v o lv e d . Se e V

t. Y a n ke e N u c le a rP o w e rC o r

p . v . N R D C , 435 U . S . 519, 543 ( 1978) (“ A bsentconst i tut i on al constra i nt s or e xtre m el y c om pel l i ng ci rc um st ance s the adm i ni stra t i ve agenci es shou l d b e f re e t o fas hi on thei r ow n rul es of procedure .

. . . ” ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed)) . A t th e s a m e tim e , a n a g e n c ym u s t p r o v id e a“r e a s o n e d e x p la n a tio n f o rits re fusa l [t o i ni t i at e rul em aki ng ] . ” M a s s a c h u s e tts , 549 U . S . a t534 . T hough the H orne s ’ rul e m a ki ng pe t i t i on w a s a dm i tt e dl ybr i e f , U S D A ’ s r e s pons e di d not a d e q u a te lye x p la in th e b a s is f o rits d e c is io n . I n s te a d , th e d e n ia l le tte rp r im a r ily c i t e s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s de c i s i on i n the H orne s ’ pr e vi ous l a w s ui tc ha l l e ngi ng the tw en ty-d ay ti m e lim itas itap p li ed to th eir c o m p lain t fo r r ev iew o f th e a g en cy ’s f i na l or de rde ny i ng the m a n e xe m pt i on f r om the R M O . T he di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s rul i ng i n tha te a r l i e rc a s e doe s note xpl a i n w hythe a ge nc yde c l i ne d t o c ons i de ra m e ndi ng th e R u le s o f

P r a c tic e . N ordoe s U S D A ’ s s t a t e m e nttha ti t“ be l i e ve s tha tthe pr oc e dur e s unde rthe ap p l i cab l e R u l es are ad eq u at e t o effectuate service of d ep artm en td eci si o n s” p r o v id e a n a d e q u a te e x p la n a tio n f o rits r e f u s a l to c o n d u c t ru le m a k in g . C f.6

O ’Kee f f e’s, Inc. v. U

. S. C on sum erP rod. Sa

f et y C om m ’n , 9 2 F .3 d 9 4 0 , 9 4 3 - 4 4 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) ( h o ld in g th a t th e C o m m is s io n d id n o t a c t a rb itr a r ilyo rc ap r ic io u s lyin denyi ng a rul em aki ng pet i t i on because i tconsi dere d sever al fa ct ors t o “ det erm i n[e] [w hether] an am endm entt o the re gu l at i on s w as . . . approp ri at e or nece ss ary, ” s uch a s “ the pot e nt i a l be ne f

i t s of the r e que s t e d a m e ndm e nt , pot e nt i a l c os t s , a nd the re l at i on betw ee n the po t ent i al benefi t s and cost s” ). W e e m ph as i ze thati n h ol di ng thatU S D A ’ s s t at em entof grou nd s w as in a d e q u a te , w e d o n o t p u rp o rt to r e v ie w th e m e r its o f th e a g e n c y ’s d e c is io n n o t to a me n d th e Ru l e s o f

Pr a c t i c e . W e h o l d th a tth e a g e n c yf a i l e d t o d o w h a tth e A PA r e qui r e s : t o pr ovi de “ abr i e f s t a t e m e ntof

the gr ounds f

orde ni a l [ of

the rul e m a ki ng p e titio n ].” 5 U .S .C . § 5 5 5 ( e ) . H e r e , th e H o rn e s ’ p e titio n , a lth o u g h its e lf e x tr e m e ly bri ef , di d n ot e the shortt i m e- fr am e f or re vi ew of fi nal agencyorders as es t abl i shed b y th e A M A A , ci t e al t ern at i v e m eth o d s fo r p ro v i d i n g n o t i ce, an d i d en t i fy atl east one c a s e ( the i row n) i n w hi c h s e rvi c e of af i na l a ge nc yor de rf

a i l e d, the r e by pr e c l udi ng j udi c i a l r e vi e w . A s w e not e d i n ourpr i orm e m or a ndum di s pos i t i on ( f i l e d a f t e rthe de ni a l of

the H orne s ’ rul e m a ki ng pe t i t i on) , the “ unf a i rne s s ” of p r e c lu d in g r e v ie w b y s o m e o n e w h o n e v e rr e c e iv e d n o tic e is “o b v io u s ” a n d c o u ld be re m edi ed by perm i tt i ng the exerc i se of di sc re t i on w here the agency i s aw ar e that n o tic e h a s f

a ile d . C f. F e d. R . A pp. P . 4( a ) ( 6) ( “ T he di s tr i c tc ourtm a yr e ope n the7

t i m e t o f i l e a n appe a l . . . [ i f

] ( A ) the c ourtf

i nds tha tthe m ovi ng pa rtydi d not r e c e i ve not i c e unde rF e de r a l R ul e of C i vi l P r oc e dur e 77( d) of the e ntryof

the ju d g m e n t . . . s o u g h t to b e ap p e a le d w ith in 2 1 d a y s a f te re n try .” ) . I n s hort , the H orne s ’ i de nt i f i c a t i on of

s pe c i f i c , vi abl e a l t e rna t i ve m e thods f or p r o v id in g n o tic e m e r ite d s o m e b r ie f e x p la n a tio n o f

w h yth e a g e n c yd id n o t f in d it d e s ir ab le to c o n s id e rth o s e a lte rn a tiv e s a t th a t tim e . T h e b a r e c o n c lu s io n th a t its e x is tin g p r o c e du r a l ru le s w e r e " a d e q u a te " w a s n o t r e s p o n s iv e . RE V E RS E D a nd RE MAND E D to th e U S D A f o rf u rth e re x p la n a tio n o f

its r e a s ons f orde ny i ng the rul e m a ki ng pe t i t i on.